Tamil Nadu

North Chennai

CC/16/2022

G.Veera venkata raju,S/o.G.Pattabi ramaiah - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager,Indian Bank - Opp.Party(s)

K.Srivaishnavi,S.kaarthika ,P.Rdhika

21 Sep 2023

ORDER

Complaint presented on :05.11.2015

 Date of disposal            :21.09.2023

                                                                                  

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

CHENNAI (NORTH)

@ 2^ND Floor, T.N.P.S.C. Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai – 600 003.

 

                PRESENT : THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,                          :PRESIDENT

                                      TMT. KAVITHA KANNAN, M.E.,                         : MEMBER-I

                                      THIRU.V.RAMAMURTHY,B.A.,B.L.,PGDLA.,   :MEMBER-II

 

C.C. No.16/2022

 

DATED THURSDAY THE 21^st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023

G.Veera Venkata Raju,

S/o.G.Pattabi Ramaiah,

No.19, Saradambal Street,

T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017.

                                                                          …..Complainant

 ..Vs..

The Branch Manager,

Indian Bank,

High Court Branch,

Chennai-600 104.

                                                                                             …..Opposite Party.

Counsel for Complainant                     : M/s.R.Dhanalakshmi & K.Shanthini Devi

Counsel for opposite party                    : M/s.Hemalatha Suresh & S.Velmurugan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

THIRU. G. VINOBHA, M.A., B.L.,     :PRESIDENT

This complaint has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 prays to direct the opposite party to return a sum of Rs.10000/- which was not withdrawn by complainant with permitted interest and to pay a sum of Rs.200000/- towards deficiency of service and to pay a sum of Rs.100000/- towards the compensation for mental agony and hardship and to pay a sum of Rs.1500 towards the cost of complainant legal notice and to pay a sum of Rs.20000/- towards the litigation charges.

1.THE COMPLAINT IN BRIEF:

          The complainants submits that the he is a customer of the Opposite party INDIAN BANK, High Court Branch, Chennai-600104 with SAVINGS BANK Account No.600879384. The complainant also issued with a ATM Debit Card. On 7.11.2013, when the complainant tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the ATM of Opposite party Indian Bank, Madras High Court Branch. The complainant did not get any money from the ATM, but received a transaction of declined receipt. After few minutes, he received SMS to his mobile Phone No.9840050454 stating that he had successfully withdrawn a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the said ATM. He was shocked and gave a complaint in writing. Subsequently, when he gave his pass book for recording the entries, he found that the said amount of Rs.10,000/- was reversed to his account on the same day i.e. 7.11.2013.The complainant further states that again. On 13.11.2013, he tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/-from the said ATM, but to his shock he received only Rs.9,000/- from the said ATM machine. Immediately he informed the Officer In-Charge of the Indian Bank High Court Branch and also gave a written complaint. He had also produced his pass book to the said Officer to record the entries. In the pass book sum of Rs.1,000/- was reverted back to the account of the complainant. On seeing the entries in the pass book, he was shocked and surprised to note that an entry was made on 8.11.2013 as if he had withdrawn a sum of Rs.10,000/- and the said amount of Rs.10,000/- was also debited from his Account. The complainant gave a complaint on 13.11.2013 to the Opposite party Indian Bank High Court Branch about the said wrong withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- from the ATM machine. The complainant also informed the Opposite party that he did not receive any SMS alert for the said alleged withdrawal of Rs.10,000/- on 8.11.2013. However, the Opposite party claimed that as per the records a transaction was done on 8.11.2013 at 15:28:31 hrs. The complainant disputed the same. The complainant states that on repeated visits to the Opposite party branch and enquired whether the Opposite party inspected their records and ATM records etc... The complainant such repeated visits and tireless efforts the Opposite party staff with the help of the then Manager Branch informed that the complainant can view the CCTV camera recordings that was recorded on 8/11/13 from 10 A.m. to 5 P.M. Therefore, the concerned Officer of opposite party and the complainant viewed the CCTV footage on 8.11.2013 from morning 10AM to 5PM. On verification of the said CCTV footage, It was found that the complainant did not withdraw any amount on 8.11.2013. The said CCTV footage also exhibited that some other person was withdrawing money from the ATM, High court branch on the alleged time 15:28:31 hrs. Hence, the complainant informed the said concerned Officer of the Opposite party that it is not possible for him to operate the said ATM at the relevant point of time since somebody else was withdrawing at that time 15:28:31 hrs. Moreover the Opposite party officials assured that they would inspect and verify it later. In mean time the Bank Branch Manager got transferred. The complainant states that he also requested the opposite party to verity whether amount has been withdrawn or added to the accounts of other person who have transacted the business on 8.11.2013 at 15:28:31 hrs in the said ATM machine. The complainant did not receive any response from the Opposite party. Hence the office at Beach Road. They were unable to locate how the said amount of complainant approached the ATM Head Rs.10,000/- was withdrawn from the complainant's Account. The complainant further submits that finally decided to take legal action and issued a reminder letter dated 15.03.2014 to the Opposite party Bank Manager of High court branch. The complainant has also given a police complaint on 11/4/2014 and visited the Opposite party bank many times but there was no response from the Opposite party lank. The complainant further submits that till date the Opposite party didn't take any steps to deposit the amount of Rs.10,000/-, he decided to approach the legal practitioner and sent the legal notice dated 26/10/15 and the opposite party received the same, but didn't respond. The complainant further submits that the failure of the Opposite party in not providing the proper service amounts to deficiency in service/carelessness and negligence on the part of opposite partyHence this complaint.

2.WRITTEN VERSION FILED BY THE OPPOSITE PARTy  IN BRIEF:

          The opposite parties denies all the allegations and averments made in the complaint except those that are specifically admitted.  The complaint filed by the complainants was false, frivolous and vexatious and is as such liable to be dismissed. The Opposite party submits that the complaint was file on 05.11.2015 i.e., nearly after the lapse of 2 years from the date of alleged deficiency in service i.e., on 13.11.2013 by the respondent. The Opposite party submits that there is no cause of action arose for this complaint as alleged by the complainant and hence this complaint is liable to be dismissed in limini. The Opposite party submits that the complainant is the customer of the Opposite party. The complainant having saving bank account with the Opposite party and his account number is 600879384. The Opposite party submits that on 07.11.2013, the complainant tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/- from his account with the Opposite party and the said transaction has been failed and issued declined receipt to that effect. It would be revealed in his pass book to prove the same. Due to the technical mistake, the automatic SMS was sent to the complainant stating that the cash of Rs.10,000/- had been debited from his account. As per the averments made by the complainant there is no amount has been debited from his account on 07.11.2013. The complainant's pass book itself would clearly prove the same. The Opposite party had never committed any default in service to the complainant on 07.11.2013. The Opposite party submits that on 08.11.2013 the complainant or a person known to him had used the complainant's ATM card at about 15.28 p.m. and withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/- It is evident that as per records of the Opposite party, the complainant's ATM card had been inserted at the ATM centre and withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/-. It has been clearly mentioned in the complainant's pass book. As per bank norms the customers must keep the ATM card safe. But the complainant had given his ATM Card to someone known to him and the said known person had used the ATM card and entered the correct PIN number to withdraw the said amount. As on 12.11.2013, the complainant has not made any complaint about the said transaction to the Opposite party. But, the complainant made a complaint only on 13.11.2013 to that effect. The Opposite party submit that further on 13.11.2013 the complainant using the ATM and withdraw a sum of Rs. 10,000/- but on that day the amount of Rs.9,000/- alone received by the complainant, the remaining amount of Rs.1,000/- has been re-credited to the complainant's account through the Opposite party's service branch on 18.11.2013 as per Reserve Bank of India Circular DPSS.No.101/02.10.02/2009-2010 dated 17.07.09 wherein it is mandatory for the banks to reimburse the customers, the amount wrongfully debited on account of failed ATM transaction within maximum period of 12 working days from the date of receipt of the a customer's complaint and it has been further modified by RBI instructions DPSS.No.263/02.10.02/2010-2011 dated 27.05.11 wherein banks have been mandated to resolve customer complainants by re-crediting the customer's account within 7 working days from the complaint. The Opposite party submits that in this case, the complaint made by complainant on 13.11.2013 to the Opposite party and immediately on 18.11.2013 the said amount has been reimbursed to the complainant's account. In any event, inconvenience caused to the complainant was mainly due to technical failure of ATM which is beyond the control of the Opposite party. However, the Opposite party taken sincere effort and resolved the complaint within the time stipulated by the RBI.  Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.  The opposite party submits that the complainant himself admitted in his complaint dated 11.04.2014 given to the Inspector of Police that himself and the Branch manager of the opposite party viewed the CCTV footage on 08.11.2013 from 11 am to 5 pm and on verification it was found that some other person withdraw the amount at the alleged time 15.28.31.  Thereafter the complainant had not initiated any steps to find out the unknown person who had withdrawn money from his account and simply shifted and burden on this opposite party and filed this complaint after a lapse of 2 years. Therefore there is no deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party.

3. POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION:

1.Whether there is any deficiency in service on the part opposite party as alleged in the complaint?

 

2. Whether the complainant is entitled for the reliefs prayed in the

    complaint.  If, so to what extent?

 

The complainant filed proof affidavit and documents Ex.A1 to A8 are marked on their side and written arguments.  The opposite party have filed proof affidavit and Ex.B1 to B4 documents were marked on his side.

4. POINT NO :1:-

          The fact that the complainant was having with the Opposite party INDIAN BANK, High Court Branch, Chennai-600104 with SAVINGS BANK Account No.600879384 and the complainant was issued with a ATM Debit Card was not in dispute between the parties.  But according to the complainant on 07.11.2013, when the complainant tried to withdraw a sum of Rs.10,000/- from the ATM of Opposite party Indian Bank he received a transaction declined receipt but a few minutes later he received SMS to his mobile that a sum of Rs.10000/- was withdrawn by him from ATM and he immediately gave a complaint in writing to the bank and subsequently on the same date he found that amount of Rs.10000/- was reversed to his account and according to the complainant thereafter only on 13.11.2013 he went to ATM to withdraw Rs.10000/- but he received only Rs.9000/- from the machine for which he gave a written complaint to the opposite party and a sum of Rs.1000/- reverted to his account but on seeing the entries in the passbook he was surprised that a sum of Rs.10000/- was withdrawn from his account on 08.11.2013 which was not done by him for which he gave a complaint to the opposite party on 13.11.2013 and sought for reversal of the account and after several visits and at the request of the complainant when the CCTV footage recorded on 08.11.2013 from 10 AM to 5 PM was viewed by the complainant and branch manager it was found that some other person was withdrawing money from the ATM on the alleged time of 15.18.31 hrs and according to the complainant he never withdrawn amount on that date nor allowed any person to withdraw amount and therefore has given a police complaint regarding the matter on 11.04.2014 to findout the unknown person withdrawing the money and since there was no reply from the opposite party as well as the police the complainant sought for return of Rs.10000/- which was not withdrawn by him along with compensation for mental agony and deficiency in service.

          But on the otherhand the opposite party contended that the alleged deficiency in service in on 13.11.2013 but the complaint was filed on 05.11.2015 after a lapse of two years which itself will prove that the complaint is a false and motivated one and further contended that as per the bank norms the customer must keep ATM card safe but the complainant had given his card to some known person who use the ATM card and entered the correct PIN number and withdrawn the amount on 08.11.2013 at 15.28 PM but the complaint was made only on 13.11.2013 and according the RBI circular any wrongful debit from the account has to be resolved and recredited to the customers account within a period 7 working days and a maximum period of 12 working days and accordingly Rs.1000/- was recredited to the complainant’s account with regard to the alleged transaction on 13.11.2013 but with regard to the disputed transaction on 08.11.2013 the opposite party contended that the complainant himself viewed the CCTV footage which has shown some person withdrawing the amount from the ATM on 08.11.2013 at 15.28.31 hrs but simply shifted the burden on the opposite party and denied the deficiency in service on its part.

          Ex.A1 is the declined receipt dated 07.11.2013 and Ex.A2 is the copy of complaint given by the complainant on 07.11.2013 regarding non withdrawal of Rs.10000/- but getting SMS stating that Rs.10000/- was withdrawn from his account and it is found from the statement of account which is marked as Ex.A7 nd 4 that on 07.11.2013 there was no entry with regard to the alleged withdrawal of Rs.10000/- but on the otherhand on 08.11.2013 with withdrawal sequence no.8975 an amount of Rs.10000/- was withdrawn from his account and it is further found from the same document that on 13.11.2013 at sequence no.440 a sum of Rs.10000/- was withdrawn from his account but according to the complainant he received only Rs.9000/- on 13.11.2013 for which a complaint was given by him which is marked as Ex.A3 and based on the same on 18.11.2013 a sum of Rs.1000/- was recredited to his account by the bank as per the RBI circular and now the dispute is only with regard to the transaction for Rs.10000/- on 08.11.2013 and according to the  complainant he has not withdrawn any amount on that date and has not received any SMS also but he found that entry in the passbook only on 13.11.2013 when he attempted to withdraw another amount.  There is no proof filed by the complainant that only through the passbook entry made on 13.11.2013 he came to know about the disputed transaction.  There is no explanation for not filing any complaint from 08.11.2013 to 13.11.2013.  In the police complaint dated 11.04.2014 it is alleged by the complainant that at the alleged time on 08.11.2013 on perusal of the CCTV footage by the complainant and branch manager it was found that some other person was withdrawing the amount from the ATM and the complainant suspected fraud played by somebody and requested to take action and traceout the culprit who has fraudulently withdrawn the amount but based on such complaint it seem that no FIR was registered and no investigation was made by the police authority to findout the person who alleged to have withdrawn the money at the alleged time hence it is found that the complainant himself is in oneway admitting and attributing that the amount was withdrawn from his account on 08.11.2013 by some other person and in the written argument of the complainant it is stated that it was a lady who has withdrawn the amount on the alleged date and time and according to the opposite party it is their specific case that the complainant has given his ATM to some other known person who has done the transaction by using the correct PIN and withdrawn the amount and hence based on the averments of both the parties and on perusal of the document it is found that on 08.11.2013 at the alleged time the amount was withdrawn from the complainant’s account by a unknown person and due to such withdrawal of amount there was relevant entry in the passbook evidencing the withdrawal of amount and since the said transaction occurred at the relevant point of time the opposite party cannot be held liable to recredit or reimburse the said amount as claimed by the complainant.  Though the complainant was relied upon a decision reported in NCDRC State Bank of India Vs Jarnail Singh & 2 ors dated 22.06.2022 the facts of the said case is not applicable to the present complaint mere non sending of SMS alert on one occasion i.e. on 08.11.2013 regarding the alleged transaction alone will not amount to deficiency in service on the part of opposite party since the amount was withdrawn  by some other person as per the CCTV footage at that time and hence the opposite party cannot be held liable for the said transaction and in the above said citation there was no SMS alert sent for about two months which was held to be deficiency in service but that is not so in the present complaint. Hence it is found that there is no deficiency in service or negligent on the part of opposite party.  Point No.1 is answered accordingly.

5. Point no.2:-

          Based on findings in Point No.1.  Since there is no deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.  The complainant is not entitled for return of Rs.10000/- with interest from the opposite party and also not entitled for compensation, deficiency in service and mental agony as claimed in the complaint. Point No.2 is answered accordingly.

          In the result, the complaint is dismissed. No costs.

Dictated by the President to the Steno-Typist taken down, transcribed and computerized by him, corrected by the President and pronounced by us in the open Commission on this the 21^st day of September 2023.

 

MEMBER – I               MEMBER – II                                   PRESIDENT

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE COMPLAINANT:

Ex.A1	07.11.2013	Copy of the declined receipt ATM by opposite party.
Ex.A2	07.11.2013	Copy of letter given to opposite party by the complainant.
Ex.A3	13.11.2013	Copy of complaint given to opposite party by complainant.
Ex.A4	05.03.2014	Reminder letter.
Ex.A5	11.04.2014	Police complaint by complainant.
Ex.A6		Proof of delivery to police.
Ex.A7		Pass book.
Ex.A8	26.11.2015	Legal notice sent by complainant to opposite party along with acknowledgement.

 

LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE  OPPOSITE PARTY:

Ex.B1		ATM card details.
Ex.B2	17.07.2009	RBI circular.
Ex.B3	27.05.2011	RBI circular.
Ex.B4		Statement of account.

 

MEMBER  I               MEMBER  II                                   PRESIDENT